.|  Baltimore Ecosystem Study
Describing Baltimore’s Ecology Education System

 
What is the ecology education “system” in Baltimore? Our social contract is to guarantee every high school graduate a complete and useful education. . What determines the knowledge, skills and dispositions with respect to understanding urban ecosystems that every 12th grader in Baltimore gets? A highly simplified and incomplete conceptual model (see figure) illustrates how complex a system must be considered to address this question. This model highlights several interesting areas of inquiry that comprise the BES research agenda for understanding Baltimore’s ecology education landscape.
 
In the projects described here, we address the substance of the Maryland Curriculum Standards, the current and potential roles played by naturalists and non-formal education centers, and the significance of variation in schoolyard environments themselves in influencing what our students actually experience in our schools.
  1. Urban Ecosystems in the Maryland State Curriculum Framework
  2. Inventory of Urban Environmental Education Providers in Baltimore
  3. Schoolyard Ecosystems for Teaching and Learning
Urban Ecosystems in the Maryland State Curriculum Frameworks
We developed a matrix for analyzing state curriculum frameworks as they relate to ecological concepts, with specific reference to teaching about urban ecosystems, the local environment and dimensions of ecological thinking. This common framework will allow all cities participating in the Urban Ecology Collaborative to compare their curriculum frameworks with each other and provide us with the first multi-city indication of ecology education curriculum expectations in urban school systems. Alana Roth applied the matrix to the Baltimore curriculum standards.
 
Inventory of Urban Environmental Education Providers in Baltimore
The BES Education Team has been an active partner in establishing the Education Working Group of the Urban Ecology Collaborative. The goal of this group is to foster sustainable communities by promoting understanding and appreciation of the human and non-human ecology of cities. UEC includes partners in 6 northeast cities: Boston, New Haven, New York, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Washington, DC.
 
BES educators help lead the UEC’s recently completed Urban Environmental Education Inventory (UEEI). The goals of this inventory were:
 
  1. To identify partners and achievements in urban environmental education (EE) for building intra- and inter-city networks, and for guiding and inspiring our work.
  2. To identify gaps in terms of topics covered, delivery methods and education services provided, and audiences served (age, demographic, geographic/neighborhood).
  3. To assess the capacity of the urban EE provider community to make a significant contribution to sustainable delivery of urban EE programming.
  4. To determine the needs in terms of resources and funds, for sustaining and/or expanding the work of the community.

 
This first study of the 6 northeastern cities within the UEC focused on a shorter list of research questions. Since all of the members of the UEC Education Working Group (EWG) are active providers of EE services in our respective cities, ours’ was a self-study of sorts. Thus, the questions are posed about ourselves – What is the nature of our EE community of providers? Here is a list of the key questions we addressed, given in the order that they will be presented in the Results section of the report. Each question applies both to the providers in each city, and to the collective community of providers across our 6 cities.
 
  1. Who are we - What are the key characteristics of the urban EE provider community?
  2. Who do we teach - What are the characteristics of the audiences we serve?
  3. How do we teach – What types of services and programs do we provide and what kinds of delivery methods do we use?
  4. What do we teach – What topics do we emphasize?
  5. How do we assess our work – What metrics and tools do we use in assessment, and how do we apply our results?
  6. How are we supported – What are the sources of support for our EE work and how secure are these funds?
  7. What is our capacity and interest in expanding – what would it take and could we do it?

 
Survey development. As part of the strategic planning process, the UEC Education Working Group identified a survey of the urban EE communities or “landscape” in each city as a high priority activity to tackle early in our development. In September 2004, a subcommittee was formed to create the first draft of the a multi-city inventory survey form. After extensive review by UEC EWG colleagues, pilot testing with a few test subjects, and further refinement, the final survey form was completed and available for use in March 2005. A copy of the survey is appended to this report. The EWG members taking the lead in carrying out the survey added city-specific information to the survey form used in each city. Hard copy and electronic version of the survey were made available for each city, such that respondents could complete the survey by hand or electronically.
 
Data collection. The survey was conducted in the spring of 2005. We developed lists of organizations to survey based on the networks and contact lists of each sponsoring organization. The lists included, wherever possible, names and contact information (emails, phones) for an educator at each organization. Development of these lists depended a great deal on previous efforts in each city. Staff at the EWG organization in each city took the lead in developing the contact list and then, with the help of an intern, carrying out the inventory. In New Haven, hard copy survey forms were distributed to participants in an urban EE meeting, whereas at the other sites, surveys were mailed and emailed to each organization. In all cases, at least some effort was made to follow up with the recipients of the survey, both via phone and email. Some surveys actually were completed interview-style in this fashion, but the majority were returned by the responding person via the mail or email.
 
Surveys were received from 147 organizations across the six cities. Response rates varied from 26% in New York City to 85% in Baltimore. An assessment of whether there was sampling bias – do the respondents and non-respondents differ in significant and important ways? – is beyond the scope of the preliminary report.
 
Questions 17-20 in the survey asked respondents to describe individual EE programs. The 147 organizations in the total sample reported on 438 programs with at least some responses to these questions, or an average of nearly 3 programs per responding organization.
 
Preliminary findings. This first-ever study of environmental education program providers in the 6 northeast cities reveals a vibrant, diverse and powerful community of organizations. The collective capacity of the groups to serve broad audiences and offer a wide range of programs is impressive. The audiences served are quite diverse in race/ethnicity and age. While the expected emphasis of programs on elementary aged children was confirmed, there still was considerable attention to middle and high school students, and to adults.
 
Our analysis identified a number of areas of emphasis of the programs and also what might be considered “gaps,” or areas where more work might be needed. Included in the latter are topics related to climate change and to environmental justice, and programs exposing people to data. An impressive number of programs provide direct benefit to the environment, the community and/or science, and this number might be expected to increase if the current emphasis on these outcomes continues.